4 - 5 May 2023 - Valeta: 36 participants

Represented countries: 30

> of which:

• members states: 18
• associated countries: 10
• third countries: 2

Represented widening countries: 10

4 - 5 May 2023 - Valeta: 41/0

> of which*:

• previously participated in N4S or other network meeting: 66.70%
• first time participants in a network meeting: 33.30%

* Based on evaluation survey (n=36)

Have you participated in the Net4Society network meeting in Athens in September 2022?

66.70% | Yes
33.30% | No

In your view, to which extend was the following meeting objective achieved?

"Get to know our Cluster 2 NCP colleagues (better)"

72.20% | Fully achieved

In your view, to which extend was the following meeting objective achieved?

"Increase our knowledge of Cluster 2 NCP's competencies and are better equipped to advise our national research communities on the impact part of a proposal"

72.20% | Fully achieved

At the end of this network meeting, in how far have you understood...?

• Net4Society's services for NCPs

41,66% | Well enough

58.33% | Very well

• Net4Society's services for Cluster 2 applicants

5.55% | Not well enough

50.00% | Well enough

44.44% | Very well

• Net4Society's activities on the integration of Social Sciences and Humanities in Horizon Europe

2.77% | Not well enough

41.66% | Well enough

55.55% | Very well

• Net4Society's activities regarding the identification of "new stakeholder communities"

2.77% | Not sure

25.00% | Not well enough

47.22% | Well enough

25.00% | Very well

• Net4Society's communication activities relevant for your work as NCP

5.55% | Not well enough

47.22% | Well enough

47.22% | Very well

• Your role and place as part of the NCP network

2.77% | Not sure

2.77% | Not well enough

50.00% | Well enough

44.44% | Very well

• How the network can overall support you as an NCP

38.88% | Well enough

61.11% | Very well

Feedback on the training "How to advice on the impact section"?

At the end of the training, in how far have you understood...?

• The impact logic of the European Commission

11.11% | Not well enough

52.77% | Well enough

36.11% | Very well

• The content of the impact section of the Horizon Europe standard template

8,33% | Not well enough

50.00% | Well enough

41.66% | Very well

• The testemony on what to focus on when writing the impact section of a Horizon Europe proposal

5,55% | Not well enough

52,77% | Well enough

41,66% | Very well

• How to use Evaluation Summary Reports (ESR) in the context of your NCP work

50.00% | Well enough

50,00% | Very well

How useful were the group exercises for you on:

• How to discribe effective impact pathways

8,33% | Not well enough

33,33% | Well enough

58,33% | Very well

• What to learn from Evaluation Summary Reports (ESRs)

2.77% | Not sure

27,77% | Well enough

69,44% | Very well

• Creating a good practice checklist forevaluating the impact section

2.77% | Not sure

36,11% | Well enough

61,11% | Very well

How satisfied were you with:

This is the main satisfaction indicator used for the Dashboard

• the meeting's agenda

22,22% | Somewhat satisfied

77.77% | Very satisfied

• the networking opportunities during the event

16.66% | Somewhat satisfied

83.33% | Very satisfied

• the meeting overall

11.11% | Somewhat satisfied

88.88% | Very satisfied

1. Keep offering a mix of presentations and practical exercises
2. the first exercise (the one with the canvas) would have benefited from more copes of the papers for the exercise and more background/base information..the topic and some consortium information was not enough...it is only enough for general comments 🙂
3. The content was really great and well prepared. Placing us in St Julian’s was not that great idea… also Malta is hard to reach
4. Less reading during group work, simpler training excersises - smaller break-outs and maybe divided into more break-out session
5. Please, provide next tíme the copies for evrybody for the exercise.
6. More detailed info on transportation options related to the agenda’s objectives would have been beneficial. Availability of mobile data and gps not to be taken for granted, especially for people coming from outside the EU

Evaluation survey (n=37, 82% of all participants)

• NEW NCPs are those who are attending a network event for the first time ever
• EXPERIENCED NCPs are those who have attended network events previously (N4S or other networks)

All 3 batteries of the survey are well into the very positive/positive marks. A few numbers stand out:

1. At the end of this network meeting, how well do you understand: [Net4SocietyHE objectives]. New NCPs are less certain in their 'Very well' answers (69%) than experienced NCPs (86%), with a gap of 17 percentage points.
2. At the end of this network meeting, how well do you understand: [How the network can support you as an NCP]. New NCPs are more categoric (81%) than experienced NCPs (62%) when stating that they understand how the network can support them, a difference of 19 percentage points.
3. In 'Learning new things' battery, new NCPs give more affirmative answers than experienced NCPs with regard to coffee klatsch & network meetings (gap of 27 percentage points), pre-proposal checks (gap of 18 pp) and mentoring (gap of 14 pp).
4. The gap is reversed (-4.5 pp) for brokerage events, where experienced NCPs state in greater numbers that they have learned more